[infinity0]

Like laws, definitions change with changing times and circumstances. I am a Debian Developer and very happy to discuss this with other members of the community. Why is it important to you that such a license is not recognised as FOSS?

[cycloptic]

I can't imagine it would go down well at all with Debian users if random packages (in the free or the nonfree repo) came with clauses saying you now owe royalties to random parties. If you installed 10 packages on your company's server that each ask for 20% royalty, your company now would owe 200% royalties. It would just make the distro unusable by companies.

[infinity0]

That's simply not true. ">X revenue a year" would affect nobody except the largest tech companies. Apart from this, it would strictly benefit existing users, because it means the projects that are properly contributing to the FOSS ecosystem, including importantly its diversity, are getting a fair share of income.